C. The Motion of Delta Energy Center and CPN Pipeline for Expedited Review of the Revised Easements
On February 13, 2002, the parties to whom PG&E was granting the easements, Delta Energy Center, LLC (Delta Energy) and CPN Pipeline Company (CPN Pipeline), filed a joint motion requesting expedited Commission review of the revised easements. Noting that the September 26 and December 7 Submissions had been pending for some time, Delta Energy and CPN argued that they were suffering harm as a result of the Commission's "unjustified and improper" delay in ruling on the modified easements:
"[T]he delay in reviewing the revised easements is needlessly harming Delta Energy and CPN Pipeline. Delta Energy intends to begin producing test power within the next two weeks and intends to be in full commercial operation before this year's summer peak season. Delta Energy and CPN Pipeline understandably have various business needs requiring the finalization of their respective easement agreements in connection with the intended operation of their facilities. The Commission's continuing delay in reviewing the revised easements is unwarranted." (Joint Motion, p. 5.)4
The Joint Motion also argues that a decision on the revised easements does not depend upon the outcome of the proceedings considering sanctions against PG&E, so there is no reason to delay a decision on the revised easements until those proceedings are completed. (Id. at 6.)
On February 14, 2002, PG&E filed a response supporting the Joint Motion. Reiterating that "the changes in the revised easements incorporate additional protections for PG&E and its ratepayers beyond the draft easements in the application," PG&E agrees with Delta Energy and CPN Pipeline that "the remaining [penalty] phase of this case should not affect the final easements," and therefore urges that they be approved. (PG&E Response, p. 2.)
4 While claiming unjustified delay, the Joint Motion acknowledges elsewhere that this proceeding was reassigned to a different Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) on December 21, 2001. (Id. at 6, fn. 4.) Since that ALJ was on vacation from December 22 until January 3, 2002, the actual "delay" about which Delta Energy and CPN Pipeline appear to be complaining amounts to less than six weeks (i.e., January 3 to February 13). Delta Energy and CPN Pipeline do not argue -- and we do not think it would be reasonable to argue - that the Commission was obliged to act on the revised transition structure easement without also having in hand the revised gas pipeline and valve lot easement.
